OathKeepers Chicken Out

The mission of Oath Keepers is not to confront the government. Instead, our mission is to reach out to people within government – to police, military, firefighters and first responders – to teach them about their obligations under the oath they took to defend the Constitution, to increase their knowledge of the Constitution, and to inspire them to defend it by refusing to obey unconstitutional, unlawful orders.

:rolleyes:

Therefore... confront government.
 
I have quite a bit of respect for this man...

Comment by Elias Alias — April 13, 2010 @ 5:13 pm

With only one exception at this point in the comment chain below this article, I’m impressed to observe that some who have registered here at our website have come in under misconceptions about what Oath Keepers is, and what our mission is.

If one has come here thinking that Oath Keepers was created to walk point in an assault on the criminals in D.C. and on Wall Street, it follows logically that one would post comments classifying Oath Keepers as “cowards” or as “the NRA of the Patriot Movement”. Those among us who would fling such arrows at Oath Keepers are excusable for many reasons, but I’m going to give you one reason why I’m willing to overlook your accusations and condemnations –

You do not know what the Board of Directors at Oath Keepers knows. Our Board consists of career law enforcement and military people. We have sources. We are given information, Intel if you will, which is not found on email chains or in private messages among the membership. One might consider that before one calls this Board and the Oath Keepers organization “cowards”. Calling us that only reveals one’s ignorance and shallowmindedness – and, in some cases, hidden motives.

Any one is free to vent one’s angst if that suits one, but I assure you that Oath Keepers shall remain undeterred in our resolve on this matter. Insults and accusations come from those who have no clue about the details which we considered in arriving at our decision. Remember always – when this event was strictly under the control of Daniel Almond, Oath Keepers was on board. Had Oath Keepers National been invited to manage the event for Daniel Almond, the problems which caused us to cancel would not have occurred. I forgive all of you who would insult me for my vote on this decision. You just don’t know what we know.

I would also like to point out that this decision is not Stewart Rhodes’ decision – it is the decision of the Oath Keepers Board of Directors.

I would like to point you to the picture above in which I’m seen wearing my .357 on my hip while administering an Oath Keepers ceremony on the steps of the Montana state capitol building at Helena, Montana, this past March 27, 2010. I gave that ceremony at an open-carry 2nd Amendment rally at which many wore openly their pistols and carried or slung long barrel guns. I am an honorably-discharged U.S. Marine who fought in Vietnam. I’m on the Board of this nation’s premiere grassroots Constitution-supporting organization and I’m directly in the crosshairs of Federal investigations for standing up and speaking out. I also publish the monthly national “The Oath Keeper” newspaper which is distributed in fifty states. And for all that, I now see that I must also suffer being called “coward” by people here who have no way on earth of receiving the intelligence reports I have. So be it. I’m offering my life for the Oath Keepers mission, fearlessly. I think I know what I’m doing, and what I’m doing is supporting the Oath Keepers mission in the face of intense personal risk.

Some here do not know what is involved, and I’ll tell you this – some of what was involved in the Board’s decision shall never be revealed. That damned government which you want to put back in its box has more tricks up its sleeve than activists in the Patriot movement ever thought of. Leadership carries a solemn gravity which does not always burden the general membership. I know some things relative to this matter which not one damn post-maker on this thread thus far could possibly know, and I’m not talking about the weather.

I’d appreciate a little support. Thank you for reading.

Salute!
Elias
 
I have quite a bit of respect for this man...

And what of the founding member Charles Dyer?

I have been watching, Hopeful but cautious.
I am disappointed with what I see, because basically I have seen empty talk.

This is more of that.
It was a good idea. Too bad the founder was set up and abandoned.
In case you missed it.
Charles Dyer Found Not Guilty.
 
Last edited:
And what of the founding member Charles Dyer?

I have been watching, Hopeful but cautious.
I am disappointed with what I see, because basically I have seen empty talk.

This is more of that.
It was a good idea. Too bad the founder was set up and abandoned.
In case you missed it.
Charles Dyer Found Not Guilty.

I haven't been watching closely. Did OK throw Charles under the bus? Or just not comment publicly? Or...?

I give more leeway to new orgs, but understand your point
 
I have quite a bit of respect for this man...
Comment by Elias Alias — April 13, 2010 @ 5:13 pm

With only one exception at this point in the comment chain below this article, I’m impressed to observe that some who have registered here at our website have come in under misconceptions about what Oath Keepers is, and what our mission is.

If one has come here thinking that Oath Keepers was created to walk point in an assault on the criminals in D.C. and on Wall Street, it follows logically that one would post comments classifying Oath Keepers as “cowards” or as “the NRA of the Patriot Movement”. Those among us who would fling such arrows at Oath Keepers are excusable for many reasons, but I’m going to give you one reason why I’m willing to overlook your accusations and condemnations –

You do not know what the Board of Directors at Oath Keepers knows. Our Board consists of career law enforcement and military people. We have sources. We are given information, Intel if you will, which is not found on email chains or in private messages among the membership. One might consider that before one calls this Board and the Oath Keepers organization “cowards”. Calling us that only reveals one’s ignorance and shallowmindedness – and, in some cases, hidden motives.

Any one is free to vent one’s angst if that suits one, but I assure you that Oath Keepers shall remain undeterred in our resolve on this matter. Insults and accusations come from those who have no clue about the details which we considered in arriving at our decision. Remember always – when this event was strictly under the control of Daniel Almond, Oath Keepers was on board. Had Oath Keepers National been invited to manage the event for Daniel Almond, the problems which caused us to cancel would not have occurred. I forgive all of you who would insult me for my vote on this decision. You just don’t know what we know.

I would also like to point out that this decision is not Stewart Rhodes’ decision – it is the decision of the Oath Keepers Board of Directors.

I would like to point you to the picture above in which I’m seen wearing my .357 on my hip while administering an Oath Keepers ceremony on the steps of the Montana state capitol building at Helena, Montana, this past March 27, 2010. I gave that ceremony at an open-carry 2nd Amendment rally at which many wore openly their pistols and carried or slung long barrel guns. I am an honorably-discharged U.S. Marine who fought in Vietnam. I’m on the Board of this nation’s premiere grassroots Constitution-supporting organization and I’m directly in the crosshairs of Federal investigations for standing up and speaking out. I also publish the monthly national “The Oath Keeper” newspaper which is distributed in fifty states. And for all that, I now see that I must also suffer being called “coward” by people here who have no way on earth of receiving the intelligence reports I have. So be it. I’m offering my life for the Oath Keepers mission, fearlessly. I think I know what I’m doing, and what I’m doing is supporting the Oath Keepers mission in the face of intense personal risk.

Some here do not know what is involved, and I’ll tell you this – some of what was involved in the Board’s decision shall never be revealed. That damned government which you want to put back in its box has more tricks up its sleeve than activists in the Patriot movement ever thought of. Leadership carries a solemn gravity which does not always burden the general membership. I know some things relative to this matter which not one damn post-maker on this thread thus far could possibly know, and I’m not talking about the weather.

I’d appreciate a little support. Thank you for reading.

Salute!
Elias

So they are laying down to the government? Did the government threaten them?

"We have intelligence. We are law enforcement and we have information and you don't. Trust us."
Where have I heard this before.

I've am left in the dark by my government, and would prefer to not be left in the dark by them too. This is ridiculous. Fuck'em in this day and age if you don't face your fear then your a coward. Plain and simple.
 
I haven't been watching closely. Did OK throw Charles under the bus? Or just not comment publicly? Or...?

I give more leeway to new orgs, but understand your point

They scrubbed web pages and have publicly denied any affiliation.
I thought that was rude.
http://freedomfighterradio.net/?p=13796
Trust is getting very hard to come by. Many patriots have been burned.

This does not help. :(
 
Last edited:
The Board of Directors of Oath Keepers, Inc. has decided

LOL.

<-- Advocate of a private Liberty Club to eliminate institutionalized grass root solutions and enable private grass root markets.
 
Yeah it's really easy for people on the internet to be "disgusted" and "displeased" from behind their computers.

No. It is not. It is quite saddening.
I too had hopes. It was following another related news story that led me to this.

it is not "easy" at all.
 
This - It's like they are trying to make me wonder why I joined.:mad:

Honestly...shit, I'm not going to say I'm privy to all the inside maneuvering that may be going on but, FFS, the whole stated purpose is a direct confrontation to government.
 
Is this the 2nd Amendment rally that ends up at the Lincoln Memorial steps with Glenn Beck speaking?
 
Honestly...shit, I'm not going to say I'm privy to all the inside maneuvering that may be going on but, FFS, the whole stated purpose is a direct confrontation to government.

Sorry, but not obeying orders is not confrontational. It more closely resembles passive resistance, or civil disobedience, if you will. Government may come down on you hard, sure, but that's why Oathkeepers has to keep growing and reaching out.

Example:

Uncle Sam may give the orders to fire into a crowd of babies, but if no one obeys that order and just walks away, Uncle Sam ends up looking like a dumbass who's just lost all his friends.

That's been Oathkeepers' stated purpose from the beginning.
 
Honestly...shit, I'm not going to say I'm privy to all the inside maneuvering that may be going on but, FFS, the whole stated purpose is a direct confrontation to government.

As I understand it, the BoD is afraid that having OK labeled as a "militia" group or such would lead it to being labeled a "prohibited organization" that members of the Armed Forces can not join (security clearance), and are backing out of the commitment to speak at the event.

Which then goes to the question of what will the organization do when members get illegal orders. "We are just going to stand down." ignores the reality of disobeying an order - is it better to fight it out legally on the "prohibited organization" front (should it come to that, or wait until "crunch time" and hope the organization makes a stand.

In my mind it is an issue of credible deterrence - who believes those 10 orders won't be obeyed?
 
Back
Top